Tools for Benchmarking of Spallation Models -First results

Tools for Benchmarking of Spallation Models

&-First results

M. U. KhandakerIAEA

� To assess the prediction capabilities of the spallation models used or that could be used in the future in high-energy transport codes.

� To understand the reason for the success or deficiency of the models in the different mass and energy regions or for the different exit channels

� To reach a consensus, if possible,on some of the physics ingredients that should be used in the models.

Way to achieve the goals/meet the targets� Selection of an agreed set of experimental data for benchmarking of

spallation models (Done in TRIESTE)� Collections of spallation models calculations corresponding to exp. ones

&Develop tools to do a comparative study

� Analyze the results to meet the objectives

OBJECTIVES of the “Benchmark of Spallation Models”

Tools for benchmarking of Spallation….. by M. U. Khandaker (IAEA), AccApp’09, Vienna, May 4-8, 2009.

Status of Participants/Codes

* Data given for isotopic targetsTools for benchmarking of Spallation….. by M. U. Khandaker (IAEA), AccApp’09, Vienna, May 4-8, 2009.

�Cascadeasf

��Geant4-bertini

��Geant4-binary

��Isabel-gemini++*��Isabel-smm*

��Cascade04

��PHITS-jqmd

��PHITS-bertini

��PHITS-jam

��CEM0302*��CEM0303*

Info.multi.Ingre-dients

Add.ExcfnResiduePionLcpneutronNeutronCodes

List of Foreseen Calculations/Codes

Participants: A FerrariAffiliation: CERNFLUKA*Participants: Y Yariv, A KelicAffiliation: Soreq NRC, GSI-Darmstadt

ISABEL+ABLA

Participants: J Cugnon, A Boudard, A BotvinaAffiliation: Liege University, CEA Saclay, Russian Academy of Science

INCL4+SMM

Participants: J Cugnon, A Boudard, R CharityAffiliation: Liege University, CEA Saclay, University of S Louis

INCL4+GEMINI

Participants : J Cugnon, A Boudard, A KelicAffiliation : Liege University, CEA Saclay, GSI Darmstadt

INCL4+ABLAParticipantsCode


* To be confirmed

Additional information?

0.1740.2740.74290.7548Alpha (Mhe4)

0.0185(de-exct)

0.0133(de-exct)

0.22660.2307Helium-3 (Mhe3)

0.0311(de-exct)

0.0333(de-exct)

0.25960.2627Tritium (Mt)

0.105(de-exct)

0.154(de-exct)

1.24441.264Deuteron (Md)

1.028 (de-exct)

1.31(de-exct)

4.49054.543Proton (Mp)

2.23(de-exct)

1.98(de-exct)

5.49765.546Neutron (Mn)Multiplicities

518.5PR (MeV/c)2.98E*/A (MeV)

8.17.9Lav50.550.6Aav23.924.0Zav147.3143.3E*av (MeV)Before

de-excitation

525.8PR (MeV/c)1.321.333.42E*/A (MeV)

7.07.0Lav52.8152.8051.651.6Aav24.6224.6124.524.5Zav68.2068.64169.1169.1E*av (MeV)Before

preeq

Characteristics remnant nucleus739.41733.752744.31744.4σ for Norm, (mb)

739.8739.8Reaction σ , (mb)

Isabel-smm

Isabel-gemini

CEM03-03CEM03-02P_Fe_1200_info

�To understand the reason for success or deficiency

�Useful to analyze the results

Steps of work� Checking and/or making standard format of all data files� Creating scripts and/or develop programs for plotting of� Double differential cross section

�Neutron production�Light charged particle production�Pion production

� Neutron multiplicity distribution� Residue production

�Isotopic distribution� Excitation function

�Independent production of nuclides�Cumulative production of nuclides


Checking and/or making standard format of all data files

� For a benchmark work, we need to handle a large volume of data files by some relevant tools-consequently, all data files should be in similar format

However, -- NOT a difficult task,

but time consuming & (boring!!!!)


1. Example for data file names

p_Au_1200_ddxshe3_g4bicGeant4-binaryp_Au_1200_ddxshe3_g4bertGeant4-bertini

p_Au_1200_ddxs3he_phits(JQMD)PHITS-jqmdp_Au_1200_ddxs_He3_cascade04Cascade04p_au197_1200_ddxshe3_isabel-smmIsabel-smmp_au197_1200_ddxsHe3_isabel-gemini++Isabel-gemini

p_Au_1200_ddxshe3_budzanowskiExperiment data

p_Au_1200_ddxs3he_phits(Bertini)PHITS-bertinip_Au_1200_ddxs3he_phits(JAM)PHITS-jamp_Au197_1200_ddxsHe3_cem0303CEM0303p_Au197_1200_ddxshe3_cem03_02CEM0302Given file namesCodes


2. Example: situation for the angular grid

No dataCascade-asf

2, 6, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30.5, 35, 40, 47.5, 55, 60, 65, 71.5, 77.5, 85, 92.5, 100, 107.5, 115, 122.5, 130, 137.5, 146, 158.5, 167.5, 175

Geant4-binary0, 10, 25, 40, 55, 85, 100, 115, 130, 145, 160Isabel-smm

Angular gridParticipantsFile name

2, 6, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30.5, 35, 40, 47.5, 55, 60, 65, 71.5, 77.5, 85, 92.5, 100, 107.5, 115, 122.5, 130, 137.5, 146, 158.5, 167.5, 175

Geant4-bertini

0, 10, 25, 40, 55, 60, 85, 100, 115, 120, 130, 145, 150, 160Cascade04

0, 10, 25, 40, 55, 75, 85, 100, 115, 130, 145, 160PHITS-bertini0, 10, 25, 40, 55, 75, 85, 100, 115, 130, 145, 160PHITS-jam0, 10, 25, 40, 55, 85, 100, 115, 130, 145, 160CEM0303

2, 10, 25, 40, 55, 85, 100, 115, 130, 145, 160CEM0302

0, 10, 25, 40, 55, 85, 100, 115, 130, 145, 160(Expected angular grid)

leray et al. (exp.)

P_Fe_1200_ddxsn


Tools for data handling

Plotting software : gnuplotLanguage used : Fortran, PerlSystem : Unix


Creation of Scripts/ Developed programsSeveral scripts have been created for plotting of

Experimental dataversus

Any combination of model calculations

Examples � Exp. data vs. all angle / model #1� Exp. data vs. all angle / model #1, #2, #3,..� Exp. data vs. one angle / model #1� Exp. data vs. one angle / model #1, #2, #3,..


1. Neutron Spectrum

Examples


Neutron spectrum with low energy projectile


Neutron spectrum with high energy projectile


For neutron production- as a test case, we placed the data and figures of all calculations in the Spallation Web site


http://www-nds.iaea.org/spallations/

2. Light Charged Particle production

Examples


Overestimated UnderestimatedProton Spectrum with low energy projectile


Proton Spectrum with high energy projectile


Forward angleProton Spectrum with high energy projectile


Backward angle

Forward angle


Deuteron Spectrum with medium energy projectileBackward angle


Deuteron Spectrum with high energy projectileBackward angleForward angle


Backward angleForward angleTritium Spectrum with high energy projectile


Helium-3 Spectrum with high energy projectileForward angle Backward angle


Alpha Spectrum with high energy projectileForward angle Backward angle

Pion plus production


Forward angle Backward angle

Pion minus production


Data received from onlyPHITS-jam,PHITS-bertini,PHITS-jqmd,Isabel-smm,Isabel-gemini models

Neutron multiplicity distn.


Isotopic distn.for

Fe target


Isotopic distn.for

Pb target


6. Excitation function


Excitation function

Independent cross section (nuclear reaction only)

Cumulative cross section (nuclear reaction + decay of precursor(s))

σ = ???

IF λM >> λD σC =

Excitation function

• Half-lives / Branching ratios: decay data library of DCHAIN-SP(EAF-3.1, FENDL/D-1, ENSDF, …)

• λM >> λD (???) TM/TD ratio can be changed


147 Sm147 Pm

147 Nd147 Pr

147 Ce147 La148 La

147 Eu147 Gd

147 Tb147 Dy147mDy148mHo

148nHo151mHo

147mTb151 Dy

151 Ho151mEr

151mHo151 Tb

151mTb151 Dy

151 Ho151mEr

151mHo151 Gd

151 Tb151mTb151 Dy

151 Ho151mEr

151mHo151mTb

Example147Sm Precursors (TM/TD = 0.1)

35 Cl35 S

35 P35 Si36 Si

35 Ar36 Ca

36 K

35 Cl (1400. MeV)0.7630

0.2251 0.98130.0187 1.0000

0.0000 1.00000.0000 1.0000

0.0119 1.00000.0000 1.0000

0.0000 1.0000

Contribution to σC Progenitor Chain

= 1.000

= 1.000

nuclear reactiondecay of precursor(s)

p(1400 MeV) + 54Fe � 35Cl + X

Status of the excitation function data

p_Fenat_20_excfun_g4bicp_Pbnat_20_excfun_g4bert

Z A σ dσ

Geant4-binaryGeant4-bertini

p_Fe_50_iso_phits(JAM)p_Pb_50_iso_phits(Bertini)

Z A σ

PHITS-jam*PHITS-bertini*

p_Fe56_20_iso_cascade04Z A σ dσ

p_Fe56_excfn_cem0303E Z A σ dσ

p_Fe56_20_iso_cem03_02Z A σ dσ

Given data as

Cascade04

CEM0303

CEM0302Codes

* PHITS provided independent & cumulative data separately. We just arranged them as excitation function data.

p_Fenat_excfn_026_057_g-c_cem0303En σ

p_Fenat_excfn_026_057_g-i_cem0303En σ

Z A σ

p_Fe56_excfn_cem0303.txt

p_Fenat_20_iso_cem0303Z A σ

Excitation function Data processing

E Z A σ

Splitted as energy based files

Converted to natural targets

p_Fe56(A..)_20_iso_cem0303

p_Fe56_excfn_026_057_g-i_cem0303En σ

p_Fe56_excfn_026_057_g-c_cem0303En σ


Excitation functionfrom

natFe target

Excitation functionfrom

natPb target

General/preliminary outcomes

1. Neutron emission�Most of the models predictionapparently similar.

2. Proton emission� Overall good reproduction of experimental data by some models, except few reaction systems.

3. Composite particles (d, t, he-3, he-4..)� Most of the models have deviation to experimental data around a factor of 2 or higher.

4. Pion production� Reproduce overall similar to exp. data by all models.


General/preliminary outcomes

5. Neutron multiplicity distn.�Well predicted by the given models (PHITS-all, Isabel-all)

5. Isotopic distribution � Shows overall good prediction by mostof the models

5. Excitation function � Most of the models prediction shows clear discrepancy


Plan to do work on……

Figure of Merit

�Statistical analysis: Calculation of deviation factor ?

� Chi-square fitting & parameter ?

Time frame for Benchmarking of Spallation Models 1. Final deadline for submission of calculations

� July 31, 2009

2. Meeting of the Evaluation Panel Committee� 1st week, October’09; at IAEA

3. Final report on Benchmarking on Spallation Models� by November 2009

4. Workshop: Physics on Intercomparison� February, 2010; at ICTP

5. Presentation of Intercomparison Results� Nuclear Data Conf., 2010; Korea

Documents

Tools for Benchmarking of Spallation Models -First results